Only a few hours into a New Year that many believe to be a new era of “change,” a young, 22-year-old African American father was shot in the back by a white police officer in Oakland, Calif.
|
Onlookers captured video from various angles using their cell phones. The video evidence gives an indisputable account of what happened: BART police officers grab Grant without any apparent reason or provocation, violently force him to lie on his stomach and handcuff him. With one officer pressing his knee with the full weight of his body into the head and neck of Grant, another officer draws his weapon, points it and kills Grant with one shot to the back.
As Grant lay dying in public view of dozens of people, the other cops scrambled in an attempt to confiscate the phones and cameras of witnesses who had recorded the killing.
For Oakland residents, the incident is part of a long history of racism and police terror. In September 2006, Gary King Jr., a 20-year-old Black man, was killed by Oakland police. Casper Banjo, a well-known local Black artist, was killed by Oakland police in March 2007. Just days later, Oakland cops shot and killed José Luis Buenrostro-González, a 15-year-old Latino youth. It is no coincidence that the Black Panther Party, largely a product of the Black community’s need for self-defense against state violence, was born in the streets of Oakland.
For an entire week following the killing, the Oakland city government held its breath. BART officials worked feverishly to cover up the incident, calling it an “accidental weapon discharge.” Struggling to win the sympathy of outraged residents, they suggested that the killer cop believed he was holding a taser and not a gun—as if discharging a potentially deadly electric shock on a handcuffed man would have been less objectionable.
The lies and cover-up fell to pieces as video footage of the shooting spread across the world with lighting speed through television and the Internet.
With not a single officer involved in Grant’s shooting fired, arrested, or even detained for questioning seven days after the killing, thousands of Oakland residents poured into the streets Jan. 7. Outraged protesters demanded justice for Oscar Grant and all other victims of police brutality. They condemned the racist “justice” system for abducting young and poor people of color to feed them into prisons, plundering the most precious resource of their community: its youth.
Unable to ignore this mass movement, officials caved. Mehserle was charged with murder and arrested on Jan. 13.
City government, state forces show their true colors
The corporate media’s racist coverage sought to portray the demonstrators as roving bands of vandals. In reality, the demonstrators who marched and rallied were highly disciplined and extremely politically conscious.
Though the protests have not taken a single life, the city has been quick to allocate resources to protect stores and other private property from “unruly demonstrators.” In contrast, other than trying to shake off any responsibility, the city did little on its own initiative to respond to Grant’s brutal death.
Even as the community denounced the police’s abuse of force, Mayor Ron Dellums stated greater powers may be given to police to suppress further demonstrations. Oakland officials said they are going to contract private security firms to reinforce the police presence downtown. The city will pay for security from its redevelopment fund. (San Francisco Chronicle, Jan. 15)
In other words, Oakland’s redevelopment plan includes augmenting the policing of the cities poorest residents. Police repression is an effective gentrification tool for driving out the poor in order to make room for wealthier residents, whom city officials and the business community see as more desirable.
On top of the large sums that will be spent on additional security to protect businesses, city officials have also disclosed that stores that suffered damages during demonstrations would receive $2,000 each to offset repair costs. If only government officials showed as much concern and diligence when it comes to reparations for the victims of police brutality and their family members!
The pronouncements made by Dellums and other city officials reveal whose interests the government and state really serve. Quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle, Dellums directly addressed the business community repeatedly as he attempted to alleviate their concerns about further demonstrations or any disturbances that might affect sales and other commercial activity.
At the same time, the concerns of city officials and their moneyed constituents show that the demonstrations have had a tremendous impact. Confronted with the possibility of a militant mass movement organized around resistance to police terrorism, the city of Oakland was compelled to do something it did not do when its police officers killed King Jr., Banjo, or Buenrostro-González: They arrested a cop and charged him with murder.
This is a lesson in how history is made. Victories are won not by waiting patiently for wealthy politicians to “do the right thing,” but when people go into independent political motion, creating a movement that challenges the interests of those that prosper from the inequalities inherent in this racist, criminal system.
The outcome of the trial is not going to be determined in the courtroom. The courts, themselves an arm of the state, would just as quickly throw out the whole case and let Mehserle walk. Mehserle’s arrest was a victory won in the streets. Justice—not only for Grant but for all victims of police brutality—can only be guaranteed through continued struggle.
